I had a conflict with a relative about a certain TV channel. When I was hosted at her home (long weekend, staying in her guest room), she and her immediate family turned on a certain TV channel that I loathe. I did not say a word and just ignored what was on the TV. I read a book, talked with another relative, etc.

When I hosted her in my home (two day visit, her staying in my guest room), we settled down after dinner to watch some TV. She requested that I turn the TV to the channel that I loathe. I said that no that would not be possible.

She wanted to know why. I said "I will not watch that channel. Is there something else you want to watch?"

She got upset because wanted to watch that channel, and no other. She kept pushing me for a "better" reason. I repeated that I will not watch that channel. Then I asked if she wanted to watch a movie or play a game. She kept pushing and I kept refusing. In the end, we ended up watching a DVD and then went to bed. She left the next day on schedule, but with a decidedly cool air about her.

(The TV in question is in the great room and the only one she had access to. The only other TV in the house is in my office and I generally do not go into my office except when I am working. The office TV is small and the only seating in the room is two office chairs, not really comfortable for casual TV viewing. I didn't want her in my office as I keep sensitive client data in there.)

Nope. It's your house and you're paying the cable bill, so you get to choose what channel you're watching. You graciously held your tongue and watched what she wanted when you were in her home; she should have extended the same courtesy to you.

I feel like the answer for both threads is the same. Absent unusual circumstances, hosts and guests should watch something they can both agree on. I think it's usually bad hosting to play something that your guests don't like, and vice versa. So I think you were fine. And I think the way to handle this situation is to say "Im not a big fan of this, could we watch something else? Like maybe [alternate suggestion]"

The one exception to gollymolly2's sensible idea:Hosts get to choose what *type* of thing will happen when they are hosting.

So, if the host doesn't want the TV on, no TV. Sorry, guests. If the host wants to play a game, a good guest finds one that's fun.

The activity is just too important in terms of setting the atmosphere.

Agreed. Being a gracious host has its limits, so I don't see how watching a channel that one LOATHES falls into that category. Particularly when misha412 put up with it when she was being hosted in her guest's home.

(I also don't think it would be a lie to say that the channel isn't available. It's true - it's *not* available in your home, because you will not have it on! - whether the lack of availablity is because you don't subscribe, because you've used parental controls to block it, or because you will not have it on, the bottom line is that it is not an option ;-)

I seem to be a lone voice on this one, so maybe it's a cultural thing. Are any of the other replies from the UK?

Deep breath, I think both OP and her relative were wrong when they were acting as host; surely a gracious host would allow the guest to choose what they watched, or at the very least put it to them in the terms of "I'd really like to watch this episode of my serial between 8 and 9, but if there's anything you'd like to see at any other time, or if you'd prefer to have the radio, or music or nothing at all, please say.

However, having been put in that position as the guest first I can see why OP stuck to her guns when the tables were turned. The relative is pretty clueless that she thinks it OK to watch TV and ignore her guest, but when as a guest she spoke up to say can we watch ....., perhaps that indicates she thought that OP would have done the same if she'd minded one way or the other.

Now, that would have been interesting. If OP as guest had said, could we watch something else as I really hate this channel, this presenter, this programme and the relative had said sorry, it's my television, my choice. Then OP would have been really justified to take her stance, but would relative have been thick skinned enough to ask.

Don't really understand though why you'd have a visitor and then want to watch TV or a DVD. For example, if there's an important episode of a serial, unless you both want to watch it, can't you record it or watch it later via the computer? Nearly all our programmes are available for a week. The only time I can think that the television goes on when I'm visiting or hosting is occasionally to watch the news, we're too busy talking and crafting and catching up the rest of the time.

I know that I could have worded my refusal in a gentler manner, but on this subject I am quite adament. In my own home, said channel is not going to be on.

I saw the suggestion of setting up parental controls and saying the channel is not available. That doesn't work for me. I shouldn't have to lie to a guest.

You have every right to control the tv in your own home.

However, about the bolded. Even if you are adamant about not watching that channel, you *might* have gotten a better reaction from your guest if you had started with a more gentle refusal. If you started with something along the lines of "No, absolutely not. That channel is never, ever watched in this house and it never will be!" you might have made your relative feel bad/awkward/embarrassed about asking for that channel, and as a result, to make themselves feel better about it, they pushed more than they otherwise would have. (This is all conjecture--it is also possible your relative would have pushed no matter what you said.) But you might have put her on the defensive with your stance, and she reacted because of that.

If you start with a less adamant tone, you might get better results. "Oh, I'm not interested in that [which is true]. How about we watch X or Y instead, or I have a new DVD I haven't seen yet?" This does not push your guest's buttons, doesn't make her feel as if her choices are being attacked, and gives her choices as to what to watch.

Then, if she continues to push, you gradually get firmer and firmer in your response. But you build up to the "Never in this house!" reply, instead of starting with it. This way, the guest is being made aware, bit by bit, that they are approaching a line that you have, instead of being hit in the face with that line the first time they mention the prohibited channel. As they become aware of the line, a good guest will back down.

I seem to be a lone voice on this one, so maybe it's a cultural thing. Are any of the other replies from the UK?

Deep breath, I think both OP and her relative were wrong when they were acting as host; surely a gracious host would allow the guest to choose what they watched, or at the very least put it to them in the terms of "I'd really like to watch this episode of my serial between 8 and 9, but if there's anything you'd like to see at any other time, or if you'd prefer to have the radio, or music or nothing at all, please say.

I'm in the UK.

I think it is gracious to give a guest the option to say no. I don't think it is incumbent on a host to let a guest dictate what is watched if their preference is something the host dislikes.

I personally turn the TV off if I have a visitor, and as a guest would never assume that I would get to watch TV, or to pick what is on, in someone else's home. I think that if the TV is actually on already, and the programme being watched comes to an end, it is OK for a guest to ask, once, whether it would be possible to change to a different channel, if there is something they particularly wish to see.

And I think that even if you have politely asked your guest if there is something hey'd like to watch, I is still OK to say no if they pick something you find offensive or upsetting (as opposed to merely boring)